You are here

NDP Leadership Race #137

I recall that with the ONDP leadership election a few years ago the vast majority of ballots had actually been cast prior to the convention (online or by mail) meaning the actual speeches and convention day manouvering was probably inconsequential.

Does anyone know how many ballots have already been cast in the advance vote?

I've been really happy with the tone of cooperation at the convention. With the bickering that occasionally erupts on babble, I was slightly worried that there would be a lot of shouting the other candidates down, or making a big scene in the middle of someone's speech. The delegates have been very respectful, letting each candidate have their moment. That bodes well for the future of the party, and our unity going forward.

Derrick, thanks for the reply in the previous thread. I'd still like to hear a bit more about my substantive criticisms. In brief:

1. What makes you think Topp will act significantly differently from Mulcair? I guess my concern is this: what do you see in his past deeds (by contrast with his campaign platform) that gives you any such confidence? Other than the fact that he never launched a brutal attack on Libby.

2. Do you believe that whither the Leader goeth, the party must needs go as well? Is that what history shows? I mean, in Canada.

you can really see the faultlines running here. mulcair's roll-out was very much the front-runner's, nash though clearly represents a completely different wing of the party from topp, and the energy she has here compared with what we saw with topp really offers an amazing contrast. alexa and pierre are really impressive, nash has poise. big big contrast with topp, and mulcair, actually.

very natural body language, still sort of boring, content isn't that exciting, but neither was mulcair. if people have been doing their research, she should end up on the final ballot with mulcair and maybe even win it. wow, ran out of time, not so great for her, just awkward.

that said, promoting her role as a negotiator doesn't compare (imo) with mulcair's "i'll beat this guy senseless".

I think Peggy did a good job. I think that "natural" sounds right. Almost felt like this is a conversation she has all the time. The speech was kind of inward looking... that is, it excited people like me, but I'm still not sure about her ability to bridge the gap between the NDP and the rest of Canada. (And yes, I think it was probably cut off.)

I honestly don't know what's going to happen with the votes. So I guess I'm gonna stick with my plan to vote Ashton first ballot, and see who the frontrunners are.

Well, Nash didn't disappoint... boring as always, very little content, she's still preaching to the choir and she doesn't seem interested in reaching out to new voters. Her argument to convince people to vote for her seems to be that she deserves the position because she has been MP longer than most candidates and that she is a woman. In other words, she seemed to say "vote for me for WHAT I am, not who I am or what I think".

She was my sixth choice on my ballot, just ahead of Singh (and Saganash, who bowed out), she just confirmed to me that she deserved that position on my ballot.

lordy was just watching the feed have never ever watched a convention before. I really liked Peggy's energy and whole thingy with the music and her words. Going to miss the rest though gtg to work. Can't wait to wake up tomorrow to see who won rd 1.

Enjoying Martin Singh's video. The medium is the message, in some cases. As much as you can talk progressive poliics, you can represent "progress" in the way you talk. Still haven't liked some other things he's said in the campaign. But I hope he stays involved, and becomes an MP.

Well, Nash didn't disappoint... boring as always, very little content, she's still preaching to the choir and she doesn't seem interested in reaching out to new voters. Her argument to convince people to vote for her seems to be that she deserves the position because she has been MP longer than most candidates and that she is a woman. In other words, she seemed to say "vote for me for WHAT I am, not who I am or what I think".

She was my sixth choice on my ballot, just ahead of Singh (and Saganash, who bowed out), she just confirmed to me that she deserved that position on my ballot.

If that were the case I might be more confident of her capabilities. She lost in 2004 and 2008, defeated by Gerard Kennedy in 2008. She only returned to the House of Commons in May 2011 on the strength of NDP momentum in the area.

That was a really touching story about why he cares so much about pharmacare. The link between that story and Tommy Douglas's goes without saying. I think it's something a lot of people can relate to, too.

Actually, I've been watching the convention with my girlfriend, who cares about the NDP but not nearly as obsessed as I've been. She hasn't followed the intraparty bickering and the rumor mill. She's gonna vote for Ashton with me, but she's already decided that if Ashton doesn't do well, she's gonna support Topp on the later ballots. Really liked his speech and thinks he seems like a nice guy.

If only she caught some of the elbows he threw at the other debates ;)

Yeah, Mulcair certainly didn't do a bad job. It was a very competent, professional, positive presentation. He didn't lose a drop of support, and anyone who was leaning towards him probably saw what they needed to see to seal the deal.

If I had any doubt that Peggy sees herself as the Toronto candidate, and thinks that's a good thing, her presentation just cured my doubt. What was the point of, as someone said on CBC, using up her time with two local councillors no one outside Toronto has ever heard of?

Broadbent really does not know when to zip it - he is only continuing to discredit himself and the Topp campaign by his comments. I have heard that thousands of members went over to Mulcair after Broadbent's original outburst.

"I think I make it pretty clear throughout the article that I think the NDP's current version of social democracy is weak and inadequate to the great challenges of our times: defeating neo-liberalism and building alternatives to global capitalism."

I think Derrick wrote this in the previous thread. The great challenge of our time is to address the deteriorating physical environment and build a sustainable society. Defeating neo-liberalism and building alternatives to global capitalism is a necessary means to that end, not the end in itself. While I don't think there is any real evidence that Tom wants to or will take the Party to the right, I don't see any of the candidates addressing the need for really fundamental social and economic change.

Yeah, Broadbent is hurting the candidate that he's been trying to help. Maybe he's speaking from the hip, based on his own biases. But he needs to see the big picture (how to actually help Topp), and the bigger picture (how to help the NDP and Canada).